august 2000 doc.: ieee 802.15-00/196r3 project: ieee p802...

August 2000

M. de Courville, D Skellern et al, Motorola and Radiata

Slide 1

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area NProject: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)etworks (WPANs)

Submission Title: [HIPERPAN: a COFDM Scheme for IEEE's High Rate WPAN]Date Submitted: [September 2000]Source: [Marc de Courville & Veronique Buzenac] [David Skellern, John O’Sullivan & Andrew Myles]Company: [Motorola] [Radiata Communications]Address: [Espace technologique Saint Aubin] [1 Julius Ave, North Ryde,]

[Gif sur Yvette, 91193, France] [Sydney NSW 2113 Australia]Voice/FAX: [+33 1 69352518/+33 1 69352501] [+61 2 8874 5404/+61 2 8874 5401],email: [[email protected]] [[email protected]]

Re: [ TG3 PHY/MAC layer submission ]

Abstract: [This contribution is a proposal for a high rate WPAN (up to 43 Mbit/s) operating in the 5GHz U-NII bands. The system uses Coded Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplex modulation and is similar to the 802.11a / HIPERLAN/2 standards with some major simplifications that allow a lower complexity, low cost receiver. Note that this proposal is a merging of Motorola and Radiata former contributions.]

Purpose: [Response to WPAN-TG3 Call for Proposals]

Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.

Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.

August 2000


Slide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

HiPerPAN: a COFDM Scheme for IEEE's High Rate WPAN

A globally harmonized revised proposal

August 2000

August 2000


Slide 3

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Motivation for this merged proposal:¬ from coexistence to compatibility: grant interoperability with 5GHz worldwide

harmonized WLAN standards: IEEE802.11a, ETSI BRAN HIPERLAN/2, ARIB MMAC HiSWAN by providing a common signal format for resource allocation

personal means worldwide operation: provide access to 5GHz band as spectrum opportunity for WPAN: regulatory issue for accessing this license exempt band in Europe, grants 12 channels of 20MHz in the US, 19 channels in Europe, 4 channels in Japan; elsewhere?

Proposal overview• 5GHz OFDM proposal merging: this PHY proposal is the result from the merging of the two

5GHz OFDM former proposals (Radiata and Motorola HIPERPAN)• MAC pairing: this PHY proposal is to be paired with the Motorola (Walt Davis)/ShareWave

joined enhanced MAC proposal• Two operating modes are provided:

– coexistence: requires Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) not to disturb WLANs and mandatory for operating in Europe (CEPT). Three different PHY modes defined for payload. Transmit Power Control (TPC) is not required.

– compatibility: requires additional signalling and the associated PHY mode (BPSK + rate 1/2 bit interleaved convolutional code). QPSK 1/2 is also used for payload compatibility.

• Hooks for compatibility with IEEE802.11a and HIPERLAN/2 are provided at the PHY level, but will require MAC enhancements

Worldwide operation at 5 GHz is achieved through harmonization of signalling fields and frame formats

August 2000


Slide 4

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Illustration of the different operation modes

Compatibility modewith HIPERLAN/2

Access Point orCentral Controller

Direct Link

Adhoc network: WPAN only or 802.11a

• Implementation of IEEE802.11a and HIPERLAN/2 signaling fields provide a way to embed WPAN transmissions in the 5GHz OFDM WLANs frame structure

– through PLCP frame format of IEEE802.11a– through Direct Link resource allocation requests in HIPERLAN/2

• The WPAN payload is conveyed using dedicated WPAN constellations

August 2000


Slide 5

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

• In US: Use same channels as IEEE 802.11a: 12 channels in the US non-contiguous 5 GHz Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure bands

30 MHz 20 MHz

5150 MHz 5350MHz

30 MHz 20 MHz

5725 MHz 5825 MHz

20 MHz

PMD - Channels

• In Europe: Use same channels as HIPERLAN/2: 19 channels in the non-contiguous 5 GHz license-exempt bands

30 MHz 20 MHz

5150 MHz 5350MHz

30 MHz

30 MHz 20 MHz

5470 MHz 5725MHz

25 MHz

August 2000


Slide 6

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Propose use of a coexistence/compatibility COFDM system with 52 carriers in a 20 MHz channel with 400ns guard time for multipath signals.

PMD - OFDM Parameters

Signalling fields (compatibility)

Direct Link (payload)

Sampling rate fs=1/TUseful symbol part duration

Cyclic prefix duration 16*T 8*T0.8us 0.4us

Symbol interval 80*T 72*T4.0us 3.6us

Number of data sub-carriers 48 52Number of pilot sub-carriers 4 0Total number of sub-carriers 52 52Sub-carrier spacingSpacing between the two outmost sub-carriers

Parameter

20 MHz64*T3.2 us

0.3125 MHz16.25 MHz

Value

August 2000


Slide 7

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

OFDM PHY overview

August 2000


Slide 8

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Note that differential modulation greatly simplifies synchronization, avoids equalization and reduces preamble length

• Compatibility: 802.11a PLCP / HiPeRLAN/2 BCH preamble (16µs)

• WPAN only: 802.15.3 preamble proposal (8.4µs)

B/A

B/A

B/RA

B/RA

B/A

B/A

B/RA

B/RA

B/IA

B/IA BB BB BB BB B/

IB

B/IB

AGC, coarse time & frequency sync

AGC settling, fine time & frequency sync

C32C32 C64C64 C64C64

Channel estimation

BB BB BB BB BB IBIB

AGC, coarse time & frequency sync

D8D8 D64D64

Differential Reference

PLCP - Preamble & sync• Include support for 2 preambles formats:

– IEEE802.11a / HIPERLAN/2 for compatibility– WPAN only: 802.15.3

August 2000


Slide 9

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

The proposal provides 6, 12, 14, 29 & 43 Mbit/s using bit interleaved convolutional coded BPSK, QPSK and DQPSK, symbol interleaved trellis coded D8PSK and uncoded D8PSK modulations. Data is scrambled and a length 52 or 48 interleaving is used.The BPSK and QPSK modes provide compatibility with standardized 5 GHz OFDM systems.

• Range for 1mW Tx power, 0 dBi Tx antenna gain, 0 dBi Rx antenna gain, 7 dB Rx NF and path loss based on ITU P.1238

1 floor attenuation = 16dB

Data Rate Mbit/s

Modulation/ Code

Coding rate

coded bits per

subcarrier

Eb/N0 BER 10^-5

C/N BER 10^-5

Range m (Free

Space)

Range m (ITU 0 Floor)

Range m (ITU 1

Floor) 1

Number of pilots

6.0 BPSK (2,1,7) 1/2 1 4.3 4.3 228 33 10 412.0 QPSK (2,1,7) 1/2 2 4.3 4.3 228 33 10 4

14.4 DQPSK (2,1,7) 1/2 2 7.3 7.3 162 27 8 028.9 D8PSK trellis (4s) 2/3 3 14.0 17.0 53 13 4 043.3 D8PSK uncoded 1 3 15.8 20.6 35 10 3 0

PMD - PHY Rates

August 2000


Slide 10

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

BER for 28.9 Mbit/s rate and AWGN channel

BER Performance

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15-6

-5.5

-5

-4.5

-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1Bit Error Rate

Eb/No[dB]

BE

R[lo

g10]

Simulation:2000 packets of 512 bytesAWGN channelbaseband modeBlock differentialTCM dpsk8, 2/3, ungerboeck(5,2), 4 states

August 2000


Slide 11

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

PER (512 bytes) for 28.9 Mbit/s rate and AWGN channel

PER Performance

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0Packet Error Rate

Eb/No[dB]

BE

R[lo

g10]

Simulation:2000 packets of 512 bytesAWGN channelbaseband modeBlock differentialTCM dpsk8, 2/3, ungerboeck(5,2), 4 states

August 2000


Slide 12

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Coexistence modes only:DQPSK - 1/2 (BICC)D8PSK -2/3 (TCM)

uncoded D8PSK

Hard decision(for BICC only)

Coexistence modes only:DQPSK - 1/2 (BICC)D8PSK -2/3 (TCM)

uncoded D8PSK

Soft decision

Compatibility modes :BPSK - 1/2 (BICC)QPSK - 1/2 (BICC)Coexistence modes:DQPSK - 1/2 (BICC)D8PSK -2/3 (TCM)

uncoded D8PSK

Hard decision(for BICC only)

Compatibility modes :BPSK - 1/2 (BICC)QPSK - 1/2 (BICC)Coexistence modes:DQPSK - 1/2 (BICC)D8PSK -2/3 (TCM)

uncoded D8PSK

Soft decision

Complexity

Feat

ures

/inte

rope

rabi

lity Areas of flexibility for the WPAN solution implementation

Important notice: the overhead of silicium required for compatibility is only used 10% of the time for preamble decoding resulting in large power consumption savings

August 2000


Slide 13

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

General solution criteria

4 September 2000

August 2000


Slide 14

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Suggest node structure as shown below - an elaboration of Figure 1 of the TG3 Criteria Definitions document

2.1 Unit Manufacturing Cost

MAC sublayer

PLCP sublayer

PMD sublayer

PHY Layer Management Entity (LME)

PHY SAP

PMD SAP

Station Management

(SMT)

MAC Layer Management Entity (LME)

PLME SAP

MLM

E S

AP

PLM

E S

AP

MAC SAP

Focus of manufacturing cost challenge

August 2000


Slide 15

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

A NIC consists of a three main functional components with minimal passive and no extra active components


Radio Modem 20 MHz

MAC Subsystem

AGC Interface

IQ

RX

TX

RSSI

CLK

5GHz

Control

IQ

August 2000


Slide 16

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

All active components can be implemented in CMOS - initially a modem/MAC chip and an RF chip, and eventually a single chip

• The modem is order 130k gates (scaling from our implementations 802.11a and HIPERLAN/2 systems):

– compatibility WPAN with 5GHz OFDM WLANs: around 130k gates– WPAN operation only: around 90k gates

• Add Dual (I/Q) 8-bit ADCs and DACs• An appropriate 802.11-like MAC is order 60k gates plus memory• A 0dBm, 7dB NF 5 GHz dual conversion transceiver including VCOs

and filters is now possible in 0.18um CMOS in a chip area of less than 20mm2 with good yield

• CMOS cost curves will guarantee the continued price reductions needed to achieve target consumer cost levels


August 2000


Slide 17

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

• 2.2.2. Interference and Susceptibility– COFDM is relatively tolerant of interference. Cochannel interference is determined by the C/N of

the modulation employed on each carrier. Adjacent channel is largely determined by specifics of the implementation. BT specs is almost equivalent to IEEE802.11a. Meeting these will grant thesame interference and susceptibility. However, better can be achieved with highest quality RF-FE (cost/perf trade-off)

• 2.2.3. Intermodulation Resistance– Intermodulation is largely determined by the particular receiver implementation dynamic range. – Subcarrier intermodulation requires operation in a relatively linear region. – Coded D8PSK requires backoff of ~5dB from 1dB compression point for non-linearised PA or ~3dB

for a linearised PA

• 2.2.4. Jamming Resistance– 802.11a cannot be considered as a jammer since compatibility is achieved (BPSK). Moreover >12

channels of 20MHz exist granting possibility of frequency isolation between 802.11a/b andHIPERPAN. 802.15.1 cannot interfere since it is in the 2.4GHz band. 5GHz is immune to microwave spurious

• 2.2.5. Multiple Access– The existence of multiple channels allows multiple systems to coexist without interference, one of

each channel. The system filtering, proposed to be the same as 802..11a, ensures low non-interfering out-of-channel emissions

• 2.2.6. Coexistence– The only potentially interfering system is 802.11a - use of an 802.11-style MAC will ensure

coexistence

2.2 Signal Robustness

August 2000


Slide 18

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

The proposed system is interoperable with 802.15.1 only by addition of an 802.15.1 stack and bridging function

• The frequency band is 5 GHz cf Bluetooth at 2.4 GHz – A separate radio is needed

• The Bluetooth MAC differs greatly from the proposed MAC– A separate 802.15.1 MAC implementation is needed

• If we add an 802.15.1 stack, a bridging function is needed between the it and the 802.15.3 stack.

2.3 Interoperability

August 2000


Slide 19

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Eminently feasible• 2.4.1. Manufactureability

– The picture displayed next slide shows a complete PHY for the IEEE 802.11a WLAN standard including a single chip modem and single chip 5 GHz radio plus an LNA, PA, tx/rx switch and diversity switch. The LNA, PA, tx/rx switch and diversity switch are not needed for a WPAN, which requires only passive components and an oscillator plus the modem and radio chips. This implementation is in a PCMCIA Type II format and uses one board side only of a six layer board. The layout is -very- sparse and could be shrunk to compact flash size. This implementation demonstrates the manufacturability of the technology.

• 2.4.2. Time to Market– Modem and MAC chips of greater complexity have been demonstrated– Prototype 5 GHz RF CMOS transceivers have been demonstrated and production versions are

in development with demonstrations expected before the end of 2000

• 2.4.3. Regulatory Impact– TRUE (U-NII rules)

• 2.4.4. Maturity of Solution– COFDM systems of this type have been built and run by several groups and companies around

the world.– COFDM systems already are available on the market place and operating: ADSL

(6Mbps), Digital Audio Broadcasting (1.5Mbps), Digital Video Broadcasting (36Mbps)

2.4 Technical Feasibility

August 2000


Slide 20

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Complete COFDM (802.11a) PHY layer on one side of a PCMCIA card -sparse layout includes many circuits not needed for WPAN (including LNA, PA, Tx/Rx and diversity switches) - can compress to CF format single side leaving reverse side for MAC.

2.4.4 Technical Feasibility - Maturity of Solution

August 2000


Slide 21

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

While COFDM is very scalable, the parameters and functionality for this proposal are optimised for the cost/data rate/complexity/power tradeoff given the relatively less demanding PAN compared to a LAN.• Power consumption

– Can be controlled by variable transmit power

• Data Rate– Data rate in this proposal can be scaled by increasing the clock rate and,

consequently, bandwidth and power consumption (there is effectively an upper limit on bits/Hz for a low complexity, low power design)

• Frequency Band of Operation– Operation in any frequency band is possible - 5 GHz is attractive because

of the low level of interfering signals

• Cost– The proposal is optimized for cost - reductions will be incremental and

process and volume driven

• Function– The proposal functionality is optimised for cost. Skipping compatibility

modes will decrease the overall system cost.

2.5 Scalability

August 2000


Slide 22

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

802.15.3 PHY Criteria Notes

4 September 2000

August 2000


Slide 23

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

4.1 Size and Form Factor - New criteria

• (1) Radio functionality/size: – Q: How backward compatibility with 802.15.1 spec is achieved, (RF blocks repeated,

shared, etc.?) – A: This proposal requires a quadrature radio transceiver with a front-end in the 5 GHz

band. With a new 2.4GHz front-end and down converter the remainder of the radio could be used and the 802.15.1 signal decoded at baseband. Dual front-end system will be the way of the future for many multi-standard radios.

– Q: Transmit power, power amplifier back-off, and efficiency at the transmit power– A: Tx power is 0 dBm. For a non-linearised power amplifier, the required backoff is 4-5

dB from the 1 dB compression point of the output PA. This can be improved significantly with even modest linearisation of the output PA. Improvements of around 3dB might be expected (ie to 2dB backoff) for a linearised PA. The efficiency depends heavily on the implementation. The worst case is a Class A output stage, which for 5 dB backoff would achieve around 8% efficiency.

– Q: Chip area, process technology – A: The chip area for the transceiver, including on-chip analog filters, is etimated to be

less than 18 mm^2 in 0.18u CMOS technology. This area estimate is obtained by scaling of an existing implementation of a single chip 5 GHz CMOS transceiver for the 802.11a WLAN standard. It is anticipated that this area will be reduced as the design is refined.

August 2000


Slide 24

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

4.1 Size and Form Factor - New criteria (cont.)

• (2) Baseband functionality/size (PHY baseband only): – Q: A/D and D/A converter precision, speed – A: 8-bit A/D and D/A provide ample quantization noise as well as head room for AGC

acquisition. 40 Msample/s quadrature units (baseband I/Q converters) give more than 2x oversampling and result in quite relaxed tx/rx filter specifications

– Q: Digital filter lengths for pulse shaping – A: raised cosine OFDM symbol shaping requires simple shift and add operations over

three samples only – Q: Equalizer length (i.e., number of coefficients) – A: Not applicable for OFDM – Q: Decoder complexity (e.g. type of decoder like convolutional or block) – A: Two Viterbi decoders are required:

• one Viterbi decoder provides WLAN compatibility mode, using the standard (2,1,7) code; this is a 64-state decoder and could be hard decision, which, together with the fact that code puncturing is not used, yields a decoder about 40% of the complexity of that required for a full WLAN implementation. This yields an approxcomplexity 25k gates.

• one soft-decision Viterbi decoder for the WPAN high rate mode, using a (3,2,3) TCM code, is a 4-state decoder only with short decision depth and has very low complexity

August 2000


Slide 25

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

4.1 Size and Form Factor - New criteria (cont.)

• (2) Baseband functionality/size (cont.) – Q: CMOS chip area, gate count and process technology – A: The chip area for the modem including A/Ds and D/As is estimated to be less than

14 mm^2 in 0.18u CMOS technology. Gate count is approximately 130k gates (approx90k for WPAN mode plus additional 40k gates for WLAN compatibility modes). This estimate is obtained by scaling from an existing chip implementation of the IEEE

• (3) Total number of chips and external components for the overall PHY solution – Two chips are required for a full PHY solution: one modem and one transceiver. Note

also that the modem and MAC could readily be inmplemented as a single chip from the outset. Additional components are a clock oscillator and passive components only, including VCO filters, power supply bypass capacitors and ferrite beads, D/A outputbiassing resistors, 5 GHz output stage matching circuit, Rx and Tx IF filters (one SAW, one probably passive ladder filter).

August 2000


Slide 26

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Delivered data throughputs (after MAC and PHY overheads are subtracted) are 20.4 Mbit/s (D8PSK TCM) and 28.0 Mbit/s (D8PSK uncoded) for 512 byte payloads

4.2 PHY Throughput

Data Rate Mbit/s

Modulation/ Code

Coding rate

6,0 BPSK (2,1,7) 1/212,0 QPSK (2,1,7) 1/2

14,4 DQPSK (2,1,7) 1/228,9 D8PSK trellis (4s) 2/343,3 D8PSK uncoded 1

August 2000


Slide 27

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Same as 802.11a - 5GHz U-NII bands

• The 5 GHz Unlicenced National Information Infrastructure bands are

– low band 5.15-5.25 GHz– mid band 5.25-5.35 GHz– high band 5.725-5.825 GHz

4.3 Frequency Band

August 2000


Slide 28

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Twelve full rate simultaneously operating PANs can operate in one POS; ORWe can almost tile the world twice over with 28.9 Mbit/s full rate PANs.

– Co-channel interference limits determine a minimum distance before a channel can be reused

– Reuse distance depends on the rate of increase of path attenuation with distance

– For a path loss exponent of 3.1 and hexagonal cells, • 10 channels are required for 43.3 Mbit/s D8PSK uncoded mode

• 7 channels are required for 28.9 Mbit/s D8PSK R=2/3 trellis coded mode

4.4 Number of Simultaneously Operating Full Throughput PANs

August 2000


Slide 29

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

The system requires AGC, coarse timing sync and coarse frequencyacquisition. It avoids the need for fine lock by the use of only differential modulation

– AGC based on fast RSSI and receiver gain control performed digitally well within the A16 preamble sequence

– coarse timing and frequency acquisition using A16 symbols– differential phase reference provided by D64 symbol (with its D8

cyclic extension)

4.5 Signal Acquisition Method

August 2000


Slide 30

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Range for 1mW Tx power, 0 dBi Tx antenna gain, 0 dBi Rx antenna gain, 7 dB Rx NF and path loss based on ITU P.1238 exceeds 10 m for all rates

• Range for 14.4 Mbit/s signal field exceeds 18m• Range for 28.9 Mbit/s link exceeds 13m• Range for 43.3 Mbit/s link exceeds 10m• (see earlier tables)

– ITU-R Recommendation P.1238 (1997) - PROPAGATION DATA AND PREDICTION MODELS FOR THE PLANNING OF INDOOR RADIOCOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND RADIO LOCAL AREA NETWORKS IN THE FREQUENCY RANGE 900 MHz TO 100 GHz

– The basic model has the following form:

Ltotal = 20 log10 f + N log10 d + Lf (n) – 28 dB (1)

– where:– N : distance power loss coefficient– f : frequency (MHz)– d : separation distance (m) between the base station and portable– Lf : floor penetration loss factor (dB)– n : number of floors between base and portable.

4.6 Range

August 2000


Slide 31

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Minimum sensitivity is -78 dBm

• The minimum sensitivity for the coded modulation at a BER of 1e-5 (a PER ~1%) is -78 dBm.

• This includes a NF of 7dB and an implementation loss of 1 dB andmeasurement at the antenna connection point

4.7 Sensitivity

August 2000


Slide 32

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

The delay spread tolerance is better than Trms = 40ns

• 4.8.2. Delay Spread Tolerance– Guard time is 400ns ie longest multipath is 400ns before intersymbol

interference – This will give at least Trms = 40ns for an exponentially decaying model

4.8 Multipath Immunity

August 2000


Slide 33

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Channel with Trms = 25ns generated according to environment exponential model in section 4.8.1


0 50 100 150 200 2500

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

ns

Magnitude of channel impulse response

August 2000


Slide 34

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

BER for 28.9 Mbit/s rate and Trms=25ns


18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25-8

-7.5

-7

-6.5

-6

-5.5

-5

-4.5

-4

-3.5

-3Bit Error Rate

Eb/No[dB]

BE

R[lo

g10]

Simulation:100 packets of 512 bytesAWGN channel + multi-pathbaseband modeBlock differentialTCM dpsk8, 2/3, ungerboeck(5,2), 4 states

August 2000


Slide 35

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

PER (512 byte) for 28.9 Mbit/s rate and Trms=25ns


18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0Packet Error Rate

Eb/No[dB]

BE

R[lo

g10]

Simulation:100 packets of 512 bytesAWGN channel + multi-pathbaseband modeBlock differentialTCM dpsk8, 2/3, ungerboeck(5,2), 4 states

August 2000


Slide 36

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

Peak power is ~1.2W Receive and 1W Transmit based on a current implementation. Circuit optimization and process improvements can yield major power savings. Average power is reduced substantially by MAC power saving modes - factor may be 10 or more.

Rx (mW) Tx (mW) 2000 est177 RF Rx

207 RF Tx99 99 VCOs

126 Baseband Tx153 Baseband Rx300 ADCs

40 DACs200 200 RAM300 300 MAC

1229 972 Total mW

4.9 Power Consumption

August 2000


Slide 37

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

HIPERPAN evaluation matrix: general criteria

CRITERIA Comparison Values

- Same +Unit ManufacturingCost ($) as a function oftime (when productdelivers) and volume

> 2 x equivalent Bluetooth1

1.5-2 x equivalent Bluetooth 1 valueas indicated in Note #1Notes:1. Bluetooth 1 value is assumed tobe $20 in 2H2000.2. PHY and MAC only proposalsuse ratios based on this comparison

< 1.5 x equivalent Bluetooth1

Interference andSusceptibility

Out of the proposed band:Worse performance thansame criteria

In band: -: Interferenceprotection is less than 25dB (excluding co-channeland adjacent channel)

Out of the proposed band: based onBluetooth 1.0b (section A.4.3)

In band: Interference protection isless than 30 dB (excluding co-channel and adjacent and firstchannel)

Out of the proposed band:Better performance than samecriteria

In band: Interferenceprotection is less greater than35 dB (excluding co-channeland adjacent channel)

IntermodulationResistance

< -45 dBm -35 dBm to –45 dBm > -35 dBm

Jamming Resistance Any 2 devices listed jam Handle Microwave, 802.15.1 (2scenarios) and 802.15.3

Also handles 802.11 (a and/orb)

Multiple Access No Scenarios work Handles Scenario 2 One or more of the other 2scenarios work

August 2000


Slide 38

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission


- Same +Coexistence(Evaluation for each of the 5sources and the create a totalvalue using the formulashown in note #3)

Individual Sources: 0%

Total: < 3

Individual Sources: 50%

Total: 3

Individual Sources:100%

Total: > 3Interoperability False True N/AManufactureability Expert opinion, models Experiments Pre-existence examples,

demoTime to Market Available after 1Q2002 Available in 1Q2002 Available earlier than

1Q2002Regulatory Impact False True N/AMaturity of Solution Expert opinion, models Experiments Pre-existence examples,

demoScalability Scalability in 1 or less

than of the 5 areaslisted

Scalability in 2 areas ofthe 5 listed

Scalability in 3 or moreof the 5 areas listed

August 2000


Slide 39

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission


- Same +Size and Form Factor Larger Compact Flash Type 1

cardSmaller

Minimum MAC/PHYThroughput

20 Mbps (withoutMAC overhead)

20 Mbps + MACoverhead

> 20 Mbps

High End MAC/PHYThroughput (Mbps)

20 – 39 Mbps 40 Mbps + MACoverhead

> 40 Mbps

Frequency Band N/A (not supportedby PAR)

Unlicensed N/A (not supportedby PAR)

Number ofSimultaneouslyOperating Full-Throughput PANs

< 4 4 > 4

Signal AcquisitionMethod

N/A N/A N/A

Range < 10 meters > 10 meters N/ASensitivity N/A N/A N/ADelay Spread Tolerance < 10 ns 25 ns > 50 nsPower Consumption(the peak power of thePHY combined with anappropriate MAC)

> 1.5 watts Between .5 watt and 1.5watts

< .5 watt

August 2000


Slide 40

doc.: IEEE 802.15-00/196r3

Submission

00245r6P802-15_TG3-Proposal-EvaluationsDay/Time in La Jolla TU 8:30

Presenter/Doc Owner Motorola/Radiata

Proposal Type PHYPPT/Doc 196r3

Criteria Ref. CriteriaGeneral 2,1 Unit Manufacturing Cost 0Solution 2.2.2 Interference and

Susceptibility 0

2.2.3 Intermodulation Resistance 1

2.2.4 Jamming Resistance 1

2.2.5 Multiple Access 1

2.2.6 Coexistence 1

2,3 Interoperability -1

2.4.1 Manufactureability 1

2.4.2 Time to Market 1

2.4.3 Regulatory Impact 0

2.4.4 Maturity of Solution 1

2,5 Scalability 1

2,6 Location Awareness 0

PHY 4,1 Size and Form Factor 1

4.2.1 Minimum MAC/PHY Throughput 1

4.2.2 High End MAC/PHY Throughput 0

4,3 Frequency Band 0

4,4 Number of Simultaneously Operating Full-Throughput PANs 1

4,5 Signal Acquisition Method 0

4,6 Range 0

4,7 Sensitivity 0

4.8.2 Delay Spread Tolerance 1

4,9 Power Consumption 1

Total -'s 1

Total 0's 9

General conclusion: revised self rating proposal

august 2000 doc.: ieee 802.15-00/196r3 project: ieee p802...

Documents